Skip to main content

About your Search

20120930
20121008
STATION
MSNBC 11
MSNBCW 11
CNN 6
CNNW 6
KGO (ABC) 3
KNTV (NBC) 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
WBAL (NBC) 2
WMAR (ABC) 2
CNBC 1
CSPAN 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 68
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 68 (some duplicates have been removed)
've sea got jobbers. >> business pioneer jack welch calls these numbers into question. >> these numbers don't smell right. >> jack welch was a successful businessman. >> this is about asking questions. >> on this subject he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. congressman west, take it away. >> you can't deny the numbers. >> don't challenge my intelligence. >> there's not a shred of evidence they've ever manipulated this number. >> people have stopped looking for work. >> more and more people have just stopped looking for work. >> that is definitely not the case. >> completely wrong. >> people are not giving up. they're going back into the work force. >> i think i get the last word. >> i won't allow that to happen and that is why i'm running for a second term of president of the united states. >>> good evening, i'm ezra klein in for lawrence o'donnell. it's 32 days until the election, though we are only 5 days into october, we've already had two october surprises. first, there was president obama's weak debate performance. and then today the jobs report, the second-to-last mo
't debate so change numbers. tweeting in regards to today's jobs report, i agree with jack welch, chicago style politics is at work here. more about jack welch and g.e. and accurate numbers more in this show later. we have an interview with cnbc. >> we have a very professional civil service organization where you have top, top economists that work at the bls. it's really ludicrous to hear that kind of statement. >> eliot: and the always wise economic adviser had this message for jack welch. i quote love you jack, but here you've lost your mind. what a coincidence joining me now is austan goolsbee, former chairman of president obama's council of economic visors. conspiracy theories running wild, and how you generate them. what is your take on this. >> okay, the numbers come from iron fortress, somewhere in the bls. it's absolutely and totally ridiculous to say some how some political people changed the numbers in bls. it makes no sense whatsoever. look i'm friends with jack welch. he's a great guy. i have no idea what he's talking about. this is birtherrest crazy stuff. i don't know how yo
was on twitter. the former ceo of general electric jack welch, general electric i should say is a minority owner of this company, mr. welch tweeted, quote, unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. jarek jarek -- jack welch accusing the white house of manipulating this month's jobs data so it would look better for the president. always up for a good conspiracy theory republican congressman alan west of florida concurred and wrote, quote, in regards to today's jobs report i agree with former ge ceo jack welch. chicago style politics is at work here. from there it was sort of off to the races. republican congressman paul brown of georgia, quote, september jobs report raises questions. quote, i don't think bls cooked numbers. i think a bunch of dems lied about getting jobs. that would have the same effect. that was from a senior writer at something called the washington examiner, a conservative thing online. eric bolling who is at fox news, he wrote, wow. obama labor department smarter than all 25 of america's top economists. or something far mo
theorists who openly suggested the white house manipulated the numbers. forward ceo jack welch led the crowd with this tweet "unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything can't debate so change numbers". he refused to back down on last night's msnbc. >> i have no evidence to prove that. i just raised the question. >> you didn't raise the question. you said these chicago guys will do anything so they change the numbers. you want to take that back? >> this is an assertion. >> jimmying with these numbers. corruption here. infiltration or getting to -- it's not funnies jack. you're talking about the president of the united states playing with the bureau of labor statistics numbers. this is mixing stuff. do you want to take back the charge here? >> i don't want to take back one word in that tweet. >> oh, this is good. what's the word from the white house folks today on these jobs numbers? are they being cautious about them at all? >> you heard the president be cautious. the president and his advisers and everybody on down the line is going to be very quick to add that there are
in the latest job report and showing a dip in the unemployment. former chairman jack welch is skeptical. meaning that employers added a modest 114,000 jobs and the drop comes at a critical time for the president who is coming off a weak debate performance with romney. joining us is new york times best selling author out with the latest book. ann coulter. at this point in time the president said we will be at 5.6 and enjoying that part of the economy and a more comfortable position and now they are running with this new number. what is your response. >> it is noticeable that a lot of economist are saying this is not possible. you would need more than 114,000 jobbings. i don't think it matters except to broadcasting tv shows or writing for newspaper what number they throw up on the screen. people know they are out of work and in jobs and they are way overqualified for and working part-time. so many people are going out of business and under working now. 23 million unemployed difference does it make? >> the numbers simply write away the 211,000,000 people stopping to look for people. >> oh, yes. pe
in conservative corners were arguing about the actual numbers. jack welch had a tweet about unbelievable jobs numbers, the chicago guys will do anything, can't debate because they change the numbers. he was on "hardball" with chris matthews and this is how he explained what's behind this analysis. >> i've reviewed 14 businesses this week from restaurants to rental cars, to widgets. i have seen everybody with a, a third quarter equal to or weaker than the first quarter. in order to get 873,000 new jobs, you would have to have a gdp going at 4% to 5%. the second quarter was downgraded from 1.7 to 1.3. the third quarter is not going to be very strong. it just defies the imagination to have a surge larger than -- any surge since 1983, a month before the election. i leave it to you to do all the analysis. >> you know -- >> one of the most important ceos of america, formerly of general electric does this ring true to you, speaker? >> actually since it's a survey, is this outside the statistical bounds of their survey, which is plausible, but irrelevant. what's interesting is you have a president, w
some were arguing about the actual numbers. jack welch made a lot of headlines with a tweet that said, unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so they change the numbers without any substantiation. he was on "hardball" with chris matthews and this is how he explained it. >> i've reviewed 14 businesses this week. from restaurants to widgets. i have seen everybody with a third quarter equal to or weaker than the first quarter. in order to get 873,000 new jobs, you would have to have a g.d.p. going at 4% to 5%. the second quarter was downgraded from 1.7% to 1.3%. the third quarter is not going to be very strong. it just defies the imagination to have a surge larger than any surge since 1983 a month before the election. i leave it to you to do all the analysis. >> one of the most important ceos in america. formerly of general electric. does this ring true? >> well, it rings true to me. since it's a survey, is this outside of the statistical bounds of their survey, which is plausible but irrelevant. but you have a president who says last budget got zero
here. business pioneer jack welch basically calls these numbers into question. had this remark that he tweeted out earlier today saying, unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything, can't debate, so change numbers. what do you say to that? even the white house though right now this morning reluctant to spike the football on this. in their statement saying it is critical we continue the policies that are building an economy that works for the middle cla class as we dig our way out of a deep hole. what is your response to those questioning the validity? >> that's really interesting because i happened to see one of those chicago guys last night. i was with david axelrod. i asked him what do you expect about the jobs numbers? he says, i really don't know. we're hoping it will be good. so, you know, it doesn't surprise me that romney supporters are now going to take this very good news for the economy and for americans and say somehow the books were cooked. they just cannot stand, and they haven't been able to tolerate any good news about the economy, that somehow -- they
did come down. unlike prominent conservative jack welch who tweeted this morning, unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate, so change numbers. okay. tuesday he was a ruthless race baiter. yesterday he was a feckless delivery boy. today he's don corleone, and there's more where that came from. congressman west, take it away. >> you are alleging specifically that the president is engaging in a cover-up of the data. you are saying that the administration is actively manipulating that data, correct? >> well, absolutely. >> good news is all this conspiracy may open up even more jobs. demand for the manufacture and sale of tin foil is increasing as we speak. essential material for all those tin hats. here in new york jonathan alter, a columnist for bloomberg view and democratic strategist julian epstein and john harwood, chief washington correspondent and political writer for "the new york times." julian, so, the bureau of labor statistics is now to be lumped in with false memory syndrome, satanic abuse, and the abduction of children byu fos in terms of
. it raised some suspicions among governor romney's allies. on friday morning, jack welch, the former chairman of ge said unbelievable job numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. steve forbes follows up and says welch is right. does governor romney put any stock in those theories and have any suspicions at all about the bls numbers? >> george, the numbers themselves are very damning. when you look at it, we had fewer jobs created in september than were created in august, fewer jobs created in august than were created in july. our unemployment rate has come down because for -- since president obama took office, for every new job created, more than six workers have left the labor force. if labor force participation was what it was when the president took office, unemployment would be around 10.7%. these jobs that were added in september were largely part-time jobs. so we still have 23 million americans -- that number has not changed at all -- who are either unemployed or out of work entirely or are underemployed working or out of the workforce entirely or un
. not everyone convinced, though. yesterday jack welch, the former chairman and ceo of ge, tweeted unbelievable job numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate, so change numbers. he's obviously very influential man. when he tweets, people listen. is there any way that these kinds of numbers can be manipulated? >> he tweets, people listen, they retweet, they write about it and we certainly talked about it a lon on cnbc. the fact of the matter is the bureau of labor statistics has been calculating this number since 1948. it's a scientific survey. they poll 140,000 businesses. you definitely have a giant sample here. what some people are saying is a possibility is that the type of businesses sampled were ones that were skewed towards jobs added. those place where is they might have add more part-time workers. we also saw a giant jump in the number of people employed from the age group of 20 to 24. the biggest jump since 1964. some of these businesses that employed more young people being pulled? it's unlikely. it's really an issue of how much data you can actually get together in 3
an unacceptable situation. i think the president will concede that. >> jack welch has said today unbelievable job numbers, he tweeted. the chicago guys will do anything, can't debate so they change the numbers. is there any merit to the argument that these numbers aren't quite what they seem? >> i would be very cautious about saying that, piers, unless i had some kind of substantialation to it and of course, we don't want to sound like sour grapes over what is good news for america. somebody would have to show me the facts and then i would be glad to make the argument. >> do you think that either of these things, in the last 24 hours, barack obama's very lackluster, surprisingly poor debate performance, or these job numbers today, do either of them constitute in any form a kind of game change moment? >> i think the debate certainly does. americans watched those debates that may not watch the next two, that saw a mitt romney that was a direct contradiction to the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of attack ads, especially in swing states, that the obama campaign has spent painting mitt romney
. you are jack welch. jack, you've got to take this opportunity while everybody is listening to you to actually say, yes, anderson, i'm taking that tweet back. i'm going to send a new tweet to say i was exaggerating. there are problems bls should look into but to throw out an accusation that's like asking the government how often do you beat your wife. >> i should have had a question mark at the back of it, ali, let's face it, but the facts, are ali, no matter how you want to look at this, we had 25 economists polled before this number came out. the average number they expected was about 115,000. not one of them -- >> yes. >> had a number below 1.1. >> labor secretary hilda so li s shot back at the critics telling cnn it was insulting for people to suggest her department was manipulating numbers for the president's benefit. >>> the obama and romney campaigns are ratcheting up the rhetoric in the wake of the jobs report. our political editor paul steinhauser hats candidate's comments. one set of numbers, two sets of eyes. >> yeah, very, very different responses to the friday jobs rep
. doug we talked about a tweet from jack welch. did that ignite the controversy? >>reporter: the recovery surrounding friday's release of the unemployment numbers continues to swirl after jack welch, the respected former c.e.o. of g.e. treated "unbelievable jobs numbers. the chicago guys will do anything. can't debate? change numbers." facing criticism if the tweet he stuck by the criticism of the numbers. >> this number is made up of a whole mess of assumptions: who is participating, who is not working, who is trying for work, who has dropped out. it just begs the question. i think there ought to be a good discussion how this number is calculated. >>reporter: most analysts and the obama campaign are dismanage the criticisms as "without evidence." >> we wonder why institutions in this country are, the perception of institutions are failing, because people go on tv and make sufficient h stuff -- make stuff up. >> they had full charge of the first two years and the policies this president put into place actually made it worse, including the fact that obamacare is tale, if you ask employers,
, especially from somebody as prominent as jack welch. what does it say about partisanship in the country? >> it says that it starts to rot people's brains. the theory is just -- we need a good name for this. i nominate job nutters. but this really is ridiculous. this is -- first things first, this is good news for the country. and, yes, it benefits the president because it adds to argument. it takes away the argument that unemployment rate's been over 8%. it's a positive sign for the country. and frankly, it gives the president a boost in the wake of a terrible debate performance. but bottom line, it's a sign that the trend is moving away from the debt sweep we've dealt with. >> let me pick up on that. some democrats are saying what debate? how much of a boost does it really give the president, given the lackluster nature of his performance the other night? >> it doesn't give the president a do-over. he had a lousily first debate. that hurts. it's not determinative. the economy's issue number one. this is a boost. it helps change the topic. but it doesn't erase that first debate. the pre
depression. jack welch tweeted this, unbelievable jobs numbers, these chicago guys will do anything, can't debate so change the numbers. and the partisan pushing continues this morning. >> on friday we learned that the unemployment rate is now at its lowest level since i took office. >> friday's jobs report shows america still desperately needs jobs. yet the president's central and sole proposal would mean fewer jobs. >> republicans in congress need to stop trying to relaxing fight the battles of the past few years and finally start doing something to actually help the middle class get ahead. >> we can't afford four more years like the last fr. prices, 23 million americans struggling for work. >> congress needs to step up and pass my plan to create a veterans job corps to help our returning heroes find work as cops, firefighters and park rangers in communities across the country. a few weeks ago republicans in the senate voted that plan down. ask them why someone who fights for this country abroad should fight for a job when they come home. >> understand that the president must campaign,
are historically low. there is an uptick of 0.1%. these numbers don't add up. you said jack welch who has been called by many the ceo of the past quarter century, a guy we know very well. jack welch has an opinion on this. >> he has a tweet being widely retweeted. i read from jack's certified twitter account. unbelievable job numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. >> okay. >> that's quite a charge. >> by jack and mark barnicle, we know jack. he's nonpartisan. >> not going there. he said that with a wink, right? >> i don't know. >> jack? >> let me tell you something seriously. these numbers don't add up. they just don't. again, i've got no dog in the fight here as far as the numbers go. >> you want them to be good. >> we all want them to be good. my dad was unemployed. i always, you know, conservatives always get angry at me when i cheer good economic news. but mike these numbers don't add up. it doesn't make sense it would drop to 7.8% with a weak participation rate and anemic number of jobs added. >> look, i am totally unqualified to weave my way through
questioned the accuracy of the data. on twitter, former general electric c.e.o. jack welch suggested the obama administration manipulated the numbers. but on cnbc, labor secretary hilda solis called that claim "ludicrous" and defended the bureau of labor statistics. >> you know, i'm insulted when i hear that,ecause we have a very professional civil service organization where you have top, top economists that work at the b.l.s. >> brown: the employment numbers landed as the campaigns put up new ads attacking each other on jobs and taxes. >> president obama says he's creating jobs. but he's really creating debt. the facts are clear. obama's four deficits are the four largest in u.s. history. he's adding almost as much debt as all 43 previous presidents combined. and over 30 cents of every dollar obama spends is borrowed, much of it from countries like china. he's not just wasting money; he's borrowing it and then wasting it. we can't afford four more years. >> why won't romney level with us about his tax plan, which gives the wealthy huge new tax breaks? because, according to experts,
, and some republicans, jack welch and others, have questioned them quite openly which most people find a little bit too far even by political gun slinging standards because these figures are widely accepted as being accurate. >> especially when they have to adjust them down, right, in the aftermath of earlier reports. >> also, assume the republicans were to win in november, they would be saying these figures are accurate when they come out under their watch. i think we should part that to one side. 7.8% is crucially under 8%. so whether barack obama wants to make too much of a big deal of this or not, the reality is it's removed one of the big sticks the republicans were beating him over the head about, which is hey, look, it's still over 8%. not anymore. >> right. as the president said today, we're moving in the right direction. we're not there yet but in the last year, we've seen that unemployment rate drop 1.2%. we haven't seen a drop like that in nearly 20 years. so that's good news. i think what it reflects is it's consistent with what we've seen in other polls recently that show
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 68 (some duplicates have been removed)